Graduate Integrating a function of which poles appear on the branch cut

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on integrating a complex function involving Hankel and Bessel functions, specifically the integral I = ∫_{-\infty}^{\infty} (2k² - Ω²)(I₀²(Ω) + I₂(Ω)²) - Ω² I₀(Ω) I₂(Ω) / √(k² - Ω²) dΩ. The functions I₀(Ω) and I₂(Ω) are defined using Hankel functions of the second kind and Bessel functions. The challenge arises from the poles at ±β and ±k, which lie on the branch cut of the square root function, complicating the application of Cauchy's theorem. The author successfully navigates this by using pole-free expressions with a small offset to avoid the poles, ultimately opting for a modified integration path that enhances convergence.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of complex analysis, particularly contour integration.
  • Familiarity with Hankel functions of the second kind and Bessel functions.
  • Knowledge of branch cuts and poles in complex functions.
  • Experience with numerical integration techniques and convergence issues.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Hankel functions and their discontinuities.
  • Learn about contour integration techniques in complex analysis.
  • Research the application of Cauchy's theorem in integrals with branch cuts.
  • Explore numerical methods for integrating functions with singularities.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and engineers working with complex integrals, particularly those involving special functions like Hankel and Bessel functions, and anyone dealing with branch cuts and poles in their calculations.

tworitdash
Messages
104
Reaction score
25
I have a complicated function to integrate from -\infty to \infty.


I = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{(2k^2 - \Omega^2)(I_0^2(\Omega) + I_2(\Omega)^2) - \Omega^2 I_0(\Omega) I_2(\Omega)}{\sqrt{k^2 - \Omega^2}} \Omega d\Omega​
Where I0I0 and I2I2 are functions containing Hankel functions as below.


I_0(\Omega) = \frac{R}{\beta^2 - \Omega^2}\Big(aJ_1(\beta R)H_0^{(2)}(\Omega R) - \Omega J_0(\beta R) H_1^{(2)}(\Omega R)\Big)

I_2(\Omega) = \frac{R}{\beta^2 - \Omega^2}\Big(-aJ_1(aR)H_2^{(2)}(\Omega R) + \Omega J_2(aR) H_1^{(2)}(\Omega R)\Big)​
H_n^{(2)} are Hankle functions of the second kind of order n. J_n are the Bessel function of the first kind and order n. Along with this I also happen to have the expressions when \beta = \Omega and they are,

<br /> I_0(\Omega) = \frac{1}{2} R^2 \Big( (H_0^{(2)}(\Omega R))^2 + H_1^{(2)}(\Omega R)H_2^{(2)}(\Omega R))\Big)<br />

<br /> I_2(\Omega) = \frac{1}{2} R^2 \Big( (H_2^{(2)}(\Omega R))^2 - H_1^{(2)}(\Omega R)H_3^{(2)}(\Omega R))\Big)<br />

The above 2 expressions are valid on only points where |\Omega| = \beta These expressions actually help avoid the poles at those points in the actual expressions of I_0 and I_2. However, in my question I don't address the pole free expressions.

So, now the square root term is evaluated as \sqrt{k^2 - \Omega^2} = -j \sqrt{-(k^2 - \Omega^2)}. And Hankel functions have a logarithmic discontinuity at the origin. I extended it to the negative infinity for a branch cut. Therefore, the branch cuts of the square root and Hankel functions are shown in the figure here.
Int_2.png

I have tried 2 integration paths. The first path starts from negative infinity (and a small delta below the real axis) on the real axis, goes just below the origin to avoid the branch cut of Hankel function, and moves to positive infinity on the real axis (and a small delta above the real axis). The delta is used to avoid the poles at \pm \beta and at \pm k. The second integration path starts from negative imaginary infinity on the third quadrant and follows the same path about the origin but comes to again negative infinity on the imaginary axis in the fourth quadrant after covering the branch-cut of square root just after k on the real axis.In the problem |\beta| &lt; |k| always. Therefore, poles at \pm \beta appear on the branch cut of the square root function. I am not using the pole free expressions for the integrated so the delta makes a huge impact on the integral. The poles lie on the branch cut, so I don't know how to avoid them or how to apply the Cauchy's theorem because one can't move around the pole jumping on the branch cut.

The integral is real when I take the integral only till k and it is purely imaginary when I take the integral from k to \infty. This happens because of the square root function. If I change the delta, the real part of the integral changes considerably which makes me think that the poles at \pm \beta and \pm k are responsible. Can I use the pole free expressions? I am afraid I can't because it is only valid at the pole points and not its locality. Please share your thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I figured out how to execute this without any warnings. I used pole free expressions at the locality of the pole. I took an offset of e-7 so that it doesn't come very close to the pole location. Furthermore, I didn't use the second integration path I have mentioned in the picture above and used the first integral path, but from 0 to \infty. For this reason, I changed all Hankle functions of the second kind to Bessel functions of the first kind. (because that was my original problem and keeping in mind that I can make a faster convergence, I used Hankel function from -\infty to \infty)
 
Relativistic Momentum, Mass, and Energy Momentum and mass (...), the classic equations for conserving momentum and energy are not adequate for the analysis of high-speed collisions. (...) The momentum of a particle moving with velocity ##v## is given by $$p=\cfrac{mv}{\sqrt{1-(v^2/c^2)}}\qquad{R-10}$$ ENERGY In relativistic mechanics, as in classic mechanics, the net force on a particle is equal to the time rate of change of the momentum of the particle. Considering one-dimensional...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K